I've been a lifelong user of the NKJV and still use it as my main translation when I teach, but I think the CSB is my favorite. It totally reminds me of the NIV84 like you mentioned and for the same reason you mentioned. It was the first bible I had. Anyways...count me among the unashamed CSB fanboi club.
When I got saved, I was reading out of the NLT but as I started to read more frequently I was desiring a translation that was closer to a formal translation, but read smoothly. So I checked out the CSB and have been hooked since and have quickly made it my preferred translation.
The CSB is such a great translation. I recommend it regularly to those who don't know what translation to choose. It's not ever going to be my main, but I can certainly appreciate it for what it is.
I am reading through the CSB in chronological order. Though it is not going to be a quick 4 months like you did. I am taking my time, one year time. That’s the length of the plan. I am enjoying it thus far. I haven’t found much that I don’t like, in Leviticus they did use the word “beer” , which I haven’t seen in any translation before. I haven’t made it to the poetry yet, I have thumbed through the New Testament jumping around verses, I like what I have read.
Hi Joe! I've read through the Bible in a year before, but never in 4 months. I think the language used in the CSB lends itself well to a quick read -- as you pointed out in your video, it's very straight forward and easy to understand. I'm still trying to get used to the phrase "Lord of Armies," but if that's my biggest complaint I'd say the translators did a great job. Thanks for challenging us to come along side you for this read through. I thoroughly enjoyed it!
1 year? You can Read The Bible in about 60 to 80 hrs. New Testament 15 to 20 hrs. The 1yr Plan is like only Drinking 1 cup of chicken broth Everyday for a Year. 1hr a day you can Read The Bible about 5 times in a Year
I switched to the CSB a few months ago. I love it because it's more literal than the NIV I used to use, but more readable than strictly literal versions like the ESV as well.
I've read way too many translations that i muddied myself up. The KJV NIV NKJV NASB NLT Douay ASV GNT RSV/2CE NRSV NCathB NABRE HCSB Geneva. I was frustrated to the point where i almost backed away from spending time in scripture. RSV2CE I cannot deny was a great translation.... at the time. The only people to give me the time of day was Episcopal church.... love them for that but I couldn't get on board with what they stood for. Wife nudged me in a Catholic direction. Love them for what they are and the reverence, but it was turning me into a monster. Had numerous discrepancies in what I understood and was reading through scripture and even what the doctors of the church had to say especially in the first 7-800 years of the church. Took a break for a couple weeks. Found a little Evangelical church in a neighboring state after watching a bunch of Matt Whitman videos on churches and OMG I felt at home. I sorely desired and needed some middle ground here with Bible translation. I loved clear readability but was strong on literalness. In comes the CSB. The plainness of what I'm reading balanced with a solid literal feel made this the obvious choice. This is THE centrist Bible translation. Not too NKJV but not too NIV. It is now my everyday reader and the ESV which reads very very close to the RSV2CE since it is derived from the same basis without the heavy Catholic influence which I desperately needed to separate myself from is what I use for deep dive study. My absolute favorite translations. I'm so glad you pointed these things out as it's an honest and transparent view of this Bible translation. Thank you for this video.
I love the CSB! It has become my go to translation. I also really the poetry in the CSB. It scratches my brain just right. This might sound weird, but it sounds like slam poetry to me and I really enjoy it. 😂
I was saved just a few years before you and I also "grew up" on the 1984 NIV. I still have mine that I got in 1988. Loved it. In fact, the only reason I moved to the ESV was because I ended up going to a new church and they used it. Otherwise, I probably would've never changed.
I didn't finish my CSB read through because I got sick twice. This last one lasted 3 weeks. But I'll get back to it now. ESV and CSB are my favorite translations. It's not a big deal if there is a verse that I prefer in another translation. I just write it in the margin 😊
I read the CSB from September to December last year… loved it!!! Now I am reading through a different version of the NT every month … NKJV, NLT, ESV, and this month I’m reading the NIV.. so far, the CSB has been the one for me…
The one verse that really puts me off the CSB is “I will dwell in the house of the LORD as long as I live.” Psalm 23:6. I'd hate to go to seen someone on their deathbed and read the Shepherd Psalm to comfort them and have the reading end on a hope that seems to be limited to this life, especially if it was someone who was expecting to hear “I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever.” Psalm 23:6. I know that the Hebrew in that verse can bear both interpretations and both are good, accurate translations, so why didn't the CSB translators keep it as an eternal hope if it is merely a choice?
@@wendydune18 The CBS translates the Psalms as prose, not as poetry. They then break up the lines on the page and arrange the sentences to make it look like poetry, but poetry it 'aint. I like the NJKV & ESV psalms as there's a sense of rhythm and poetry to them. The CSB even manages to make the NIV psalms seem poetic in comparison. I'm trying really hard to like the CSB and I'm going to stick with it for a while, but I keep having a feeling that it is a clear and reliable translation but it is not a good translation simply because the English style is so incredibly dull.
I moved fro NASB to CSB in the early in 2006 I believe. It is my go to. I still consult NASB, ESV, NET, LSB, and others on a regular basis. In 2023 I did my daily reading in the CSB Ancient Faith using a Chronological reading plan. This year I will use the CSB reader and go back to a canonical reading plan. I also do my memorization and preaching from the CSB.
Have you listened to an audio bible reading in addition to reading from your physical bible? I'm interested to know if you have any experience with both formats and what factors influence your preference for reading the physical bible predominantly.
1. I can't wait for your thoughts about the CSB, Pastor Joe! 😊 2. In general, I'm an ESV guy, but I've been reading through the CSB since so many people recommend it. I'm enjoying it, but I think I still prefer the ESV - at least so far, but I'm far from finishing the CSB in its entirety. However, the CSB might be a good secondary translation for me. As best as I can tell, the CSB seems like it's somewhere between the ESV and the NIV, though closer to the NIV in my estimation. 3. Most scholars use 3 or 4 criteria to judge or assess translations in general: a. Accuracy. Overall, I think the CSB is slightly more accurate than the NIV. However, in my opinion, the CSB is better on the controversial gender issues than the NIV 2011. b. Clarity. The CSB and the NIV are both quite clear. But what I like about the CSB is that it escapes from the Tyndale-KJV tradition in many places, whereas the NIV is still somewhat indebted to the Tyndale-KJV tradition (as are many other of our translations, especially the ESV which in my view is the best heir to the Tyndale-KJV tradition today). However, if someone finds the phrases of the Tyndale-KJV tradition more familiar or even euphonic, then they may not like the CSB as much. c. Naturalness. The CSB is far more natural sounding than the ESV (the ESV often sounds like Yoda is speaking), though the CSB is more or less equal to the NIV in terms of naturalness. However, the CSB is more plainspoken in terms of literary style, even in sections where there is and should be a higher register (e.g. the prologue to Luke, Hebrews, poetic sections), which I think is a key weakness of the CSB. The CSB is lacking in literary style. It's not bad, just not great. It doesn't really stand out, at least to my ears, whereas the ESV (thanks in large part to the Tyndale-KJV tradition) is stylistically beautiful in an understated way and as such quite memorable, which in turn is an aid in memorization. The best natural-sounding modern English translation is the NLT, but it is more loose in terms of faithfulness to the form and structure of the biblical languages. d. Audience appropriateness. The CSB is quite appropriate to most English speakers, those who speak English as a second language, young and old, and as such serves a wide audience. Of course, so are other translations like the NIV, and especially the NLT. The ESV isn't as easily understandable by as many different groups; the ESV usually requires a higher degree of facility with the English language.
@@Rozalyn508 Unfortunately the average reading level of the majority of people in the US is around a 7th to 8th grade reading level. So a 10th grade reading level is actually a bit more than expected for most people. I think statistics are similar in other English speaking nations like the UK, Canada, etc.
The CSB has had a favorable response in our SBC churches across Louisiana, much more so than the HCSB. But it still hasn’t supplanted the KJV or the ESV with most congregants.
I also grew up on the NIV84; it was an excellent translation. I hate that Zondervan phased it out, and I was worried Lockman would do the same with the NASB95.
Yes, very similar to the early NIV. The CSB, though it will never be my primary translation, was particularly helpful to me in the Pentateuch and the OT historical books.
Even though I too prefer the term flesh in Gal. 2:20, "body" is a good word to bring the actual meaning of that verse into English. In Gal. 2:20 Paul is not talking about the sinful flesh that cannot please God no matter what (Rom. 8:5-8). We know this because in Gal. 2:20, Paul is in his flesh living by faith, which cannot be done if he means the other term. That is contradictory. "Body" is a good translation. Then, if you jump down to Gal. 3:3, it uses the term "flesh" in that correct sinful, evil, wicked human effort manner, which is apart from faith. So, I dont actually mind that CSB translation of Gal. 2:20. Still, I will stick with my NAS95.
CSB I found to be missing a verse in Matthew..and it's a very crucial verse about fasting and praying fir deliverance ...fasting is the key breaking strongholds for deliverance..I don't recommend this version.. mine is in the trash..and that's just the first problem I found..😊
You shouldn't throw away the holy scriptures it sacred for a reason. You should of just donated to a library instead of throwing it away. Shame on you.
I want to like the CSB, but I'm really put off by the translation team's choice with the second half of Genesis 1:5 CSB: There was an evening, and there was a morning: one day. Compare it to the NIV, ESV and NLT all below: NIV: And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day. ESV: And there was evening and there was morning, the first day. NLT: And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day. Notice the CSB refers to it as simply "one day" rather than "the first day". This could suggest the translation team do not have faith in the first day being exactly that - the first one. They may side with the secular idea of billions of years and then some kind of "recreation". They may not, of course, but the translation choice is very dubious. They go on to correctly translate the remaining days of creation as "the second day", "the third day", etc, but that "one day" translation is really jarring. While I'd really like to give the CSB more attention, a bible that makes such a big blunder so quickly doesn't fill me with much confidence.
I've been a lifelong user of the NKJV and still use it as my main translation when I teach, but I think the CSB is my favorite. It totally reminds me of the NIV84 like you mentioned and for the same reason you mentioned. It was the first bible I had.
Anyways...count me among the unashamed CSB fanboi club.
It is a very good translation.
When I got saved, I was reading out of the NLT but as I started to read more frequently I was desiring a translation that was closer to a formal translation, but read smoothly. So I checked out the CSB and have been hooked since and have quickly made it my preferred translation.
It’s a fantastic translation!
I just switched the CSB recently.
I haven’t started a formal read through yet. I am excited to.
Go for it!
I had a great time with the CSB. Thanks for bringing us together to do this. Happy New Year everyone. 🎉
I'm glad you enjoyed your read through of the CSB.
The "want" in Psalm 23 means "lack" during the time of KJV. It really means "I have no lack" which the CSB translated really well.
Yes, correct.
CSB my favorite translation. I really liked NASB, and NIV, but CSB won me over.
I really like the CSB! I love it.
The CSB is such a great translation. I recommend it regularly to those who don't know what translation to choose. It's not ever going to be my main, but I can certainly appreciate it for what it is.
It really is a great translation. The ESV or the NASB will be my main translations but the CSB is immediately after those two.
I am reading through the CSB in chronological order. Though it is not going to be a quick 4 months like you did. I am taking my time, one year time. That’s the length of the plan. I am enjoying it thus far. I haven’t found much that I don’t like, in Leviticus they did use the word “beer” , which I haven’t seen in any translation before. I haven’t made it to the poetry yet, I have thumbed through the New Testament jumping around verses, I like what I have read.
Blessings to you as you read through the CSB in chronological order.
Thank you, Brother Joe.🌹⭐🌹
You're welcome.
Hi Joe! I've read through the Bible in a year before, but never in 4 months. I think the language used in the CSB lends itself well to a quick read -- as you pointed out in your video, it's very straight forward and easy to understand. I'm still trying to get used to the phrase "Lord of Armies," but if that's my biggest complaint I'd say the translators did a great job. Thanks for challenging us to come along side you for this read through. I thoroughly enjoyed it!
1 year? You can Read The Bible in about 60 to 80 hrs. New Testament 15 to 20 hrs. The 1yr Plan is like only Drinking 1 cup of chicken broth Everyday for a Year. 1hr a day you can Read The Bible about 5 times in a Year
I actually really like "the Lord of Armies." That sounds very clear to me.
I switched to the CSB a few months ago. I love it because it's more literal than the NIV I used to use, but more readable than strictly literal versions like the ESV as well.
It’s a fantastic translation for sure.
It’s a fantastic translation for sure!
I've read way too many translations that i muddied myself up. The KJV NIV NKJV NASB NLT Douay ASV GNT RSV/2CE NRSV NCathB NABRE HCSB Geneva. I was frustrated to the point where i almost backed away from spending time in scripture. RSV2CE I cannot deny was a great translation.... at the time. The only people to give me the time of day was Episcopal church.... love them for that but I couldn't get on board with what they stood for. Wife nudged me in a Catholic direction. Love them for what they are and the reverence, but it was turning me into a monster. Had numerous discrepancies in what I understood and was reading through scripture and even what the doctors of the church had to say especially in the first 7-800 years of the church. Took a break for a couple weeks. Found a little Evangelical church in a neighboring state after watching a bunch of Matt Whitman videos on churches and OMG I felt at home. I sorely desired and needed some middle ground here with Bible translation. I loved clear readability but was strong on literalness. In comes the CSB. The plainness of what I'm reading balanced with a solid literal feel made this the obvious choice. This is THE centrist Bible translation. Not too NKJV but not too NIV. It is now my everyday reader and the ESV which reads very very close to the RSV2CE since it is derived from the same basis without the heavy Catholic influence which I desperately needed to separate myself from is what I use for deep dive study. My absolute favorite translations. I'm so glad you pointed these things out as it's an honest and transparent view of this Bible translation. Thank you for this video.
You’re very welcome!
Thank you 🙏🏻 I love CSB
You’re welcome. Thanks for watching and commenting!
@@joesbibles5636 ❤️
I love the CSB! It has become my go to translation. I also really the poetry in the CSB. It scratches my brain just right. This might sound weird, but it sounds like slam poetry to me and I really enjoy it. 😂
LOL Love it - it scratches my brain just right! Awesome.
I was saved just a few years before you and I also "grew up" on the 1984 NIV. I still have mine that I got in 1988. Loved it. In fact, the only reason I moved to the ESV was because I ended up going to a new church and they used it. Otherwise, I probably would've never changed.
Very cool! I still have my NIV Study Bible in the 84.
I didn't finish my CSB read through because I got sick twice. This last one lasted 3 weeks. But I'll get back to it now.
ESV and CSB are my favorite translations. It's not a big deal if there is a verse that I prefer in another translation. I just write it in the margin 😊
Jump back on it and finish it up. There's no rule that says you gotta finish in 4 months or even a year.
I read the CSB from September to December last year… loved it!!! Now I am reading through a different version of the NT every month … NKJV, NLT, ESV, and this month I’m reading the NIV.. so far, the CSB has been the one for me…
It is a very, very good translation. I think it's my number 2 or 3 translation. ESV is #1 and the CSB might be a close second behind it.
@@joesbibles5636 For me… I am a bit concerned about the Reformed bias of the translators of the ESV as I am not in that camp…
The one verse that really puts me off the CSB is “I will dwell in the house of the LORD as long as I live.” Psalm 23:6. I'd hate to go to seen someone on their deathbed and read the Shepherd Psalm to comfort them and have the reading end on a hope that seems to be limited to this life, especially if it was someone who was expecting to hear “I will dwell in the house of the LORD forever.” Psalm 23:6. I know that the Hebrew in that verse can bear both interpretations and both are good, accurate translations, so why didn't the CSB translators keep it as an eternal hope if it is merely a choice?
Great question. I'm not sure. I may have to look into that one.
It's interesting you point this out. I actually like to go to the NKJV for Psalms vs. CSB. I really enjoy CSB for reading otherwise.
@@wendydune18 The CBS translates the Psalms as prose, not as poetry. They then break up the lines on the page and arrange the sentences to make it look like poetry, but poetry it 'aint.
I like the NJKV & ESV psalms as there's a sense of rhythm and poetry to them. The CSB even manages to make the NIV psalms seem poetic in comparison.
I'm trying really hard to like the CSB and I'm going to stick with it for a while, but I keep having a feeling that it is a clear and reliable translation but it is not a good translation simply because the English style is so incredibly dull.
I love the CSB! Switched over from the ESV as my favorite. I like the way my life verse reads, which is Ezekiel 36:26,27.
I love that verse! And the CSB does that right!
I moved fro NASB to CSB in the early in 2006 I believe. It is my go to. I still consult NASB, ESV, NET, LSB, and others on a regular basis. In 2023 I did my daily reading in the CSB Ancient Faith using a Chronological reading plan. This year I will use the CSB reader and go back to a canonical reading plan. I also do my memorization and preaching from the CSB.
Which CSB Reader?
@@joesbibles5636 The Five volume
Haven't read the CSB yet but plan to!
I hope you give it a chance.
Good❤
It really is! Thanks for watching the video.
Have you listened to an audio bible reading in addition to reading from your physical bible? I'm interested to know if you have any experience with both formats and what factors influence your preference for reading the physical bible predominantly.
I did listen, partially, to the audio version of the CSB to help me read through it.
1. I can't wait for your thoughts about the CSB, Pastor Joe! 😊
2. In general, I'm an ESV guy, but I've been reading through the CSB since so many people recommend it. I'm enjoying it, but I think I still prefer the ESV - at least so far, but I'm far from finishing the CSB in its entirety. However, the CSB might be a good secondary translation for me. As best as I can tell, the CSB seems like it's somewhere between the ESV and the NIV, though closer to the NIV in my estimation.
3. Most scholars use 3 or 4 criteria to judge or assess translations in general:
a. Accuracy. Overall, I think the CSB is slightly more accurate than the NIV. However, in my opinion, the CSB is better on the controversial gender issues than the NIV 2011.
b. Clarity. The CSB and the NIV are both quite clear. But what I like about the CSB is that it escapes from the Tyndale-KJV tradition in many places, whereas the NIV is still somewhat indebted to the Tyndale-KJV tradition (as are many other of our translations, especially the ESV which in my view is the best heir to the Tyndale-KJV tradition today). However, if someone finds the phrases of the Tyndale-KJV tradition more familiar or even euphonic, then they may not like the CSB as much.
c. Naturalness. The CSB is far more natural sounding than the ESV (the ESV often sounds like Yoda is speaking), though the CSB is more or less equal to the NIV in terms of naturalness. However, the CSB is more plainspoken in terms of literary style, even in sections where there is and should be a higher register (e.g. the prologue to Luke, Hebrews, poetic sections), which I think is a key weakness of the CSB. The CSB is lacking in literary style. It's not bad, just not great. It doesn't really stand out, at least to my ears, whereas the ESV (thanks in large part to the Tyndale-KJV tradition) is stylistically beautiful in an understated way and as such quite memorable, which in turn is an aid in memorization. The best natural-sounding modern English translation is the NLT, but it is more loose in terms of faithfulness to the form and structure of the biblical languages.
d. Audience appropriateness. The CSB is quite appropriate to most English speakers, those who speak English as a second language, young and old, and as such serves a wide audience. Of course, so are other translations like the NIV, and especially the NLT. The ESV isn't as easily understandable by as many different groups; the ESV usually requires a higher degree of facility with the English language.
Great rubric for determining translation choice. Thanks.
The ESV is at a tenth grade reading level. How much more educated can you get with a tenth grade reading level?
@@Rozalyn508 Unfortunately the average reading level of the majority of people in the US is around a 7th to 8th grade reading level. So a 10th grade reading level is actually a bit more than expected for most people. I think statistics are similar in other English speaking nations like the UK, Canada, etc.
Great read through! I really enjoyed the poetry as well!! 😊
Hi Cassie!
😊
The CSB has had a favorable response in our SBC churches across Louisiana, much more so than the HCSB. But it still hasn’t supplanted the KJV or the ESV with most congregants.
Interesting. So it is a baptist translation? LOL ;)
I also grew up on the NIV84; it was an excellent translation. I hate that Zondervan phased it out, and I was worried Lockman would do the same with the NASB95.
I hate it too. I have 3 print copies left of the NIV84.
@@joesbibles5636
The Cambridge NIV84 Wide Margin (bonded) was my first premium Bible. They made excellent 2-piece slipcases back then.
Yes, very similar to the early NIV. The CSB, though it will never be my primary translation, was particularly helpful to me in the Pentateuch and the OT historical books.
I agree. It was helpful for me, too.
GAL 2:20 MY LIFE VERSE ALSO.
Friends! Twinsies?
I believe the csb is geared more towards young adults and teens.
Maybe, though it is not explicitly so. But I've also seen people whose first language is not English gravitate towards it.
I'm 24 😅 it's my MAIN bible
Even though I too prefer the term flesh in Gal. 2:20, "body" is a good word to bring the actual meaning of that verse into English. In Gal. 2:20 Paul is not talking about the sinful flesh that cannot please God no matter what (Rom. 8:5-8). We know this because in Gal. 2:20, Paul is in his flesh living by faith, which cannot be done if he means the other term. That is contradictory. "Body" is a good translation. Then, if you jump down to Gal. 3:3, it uses the term "flesh" in that correct sinful, evil, wicked human effort manner, which is apart from faith. So, I dont actually mind that CSB translation of Gal. 2:20. Still, I will stick with my NAS95.
I'm good with both translations too. But I prefer "flesh".
CSB I found to be missing a verse in Matthew..and it's a very crucial verse about fasting and praying fir deliverance ...fasting is the key breaking strongholds for deliverance..I don't recommend this version.. mine is in the trash..and that's just the first problem I found..😊
Thanks for your reply. I appreciate it.
You shouldn't throw away the holy scriptures it sacred for a reason. You should of just donated to a library instead of throwing it away. Shame on you.
@@Rozalyn508 bless you❤
I want to like the CSB, but I'm really put off by the translation team's choice with the second half of Genesis 1:5
CSB: There was an evening, and there was a morning: one day.
Compare it to the NIV, ESV and NLT all below:
NIV: And there was evening, and there was morning-the first day.
ESV: And there was evening and there was morning, the first day.
NLT: And evening passed and morning came, marking the first day.
Notice the CSB refers to it as simply "one day" rather than "the first day". This could suggest the translation team do not have faith in the first day being exactly that - the first one. They may side with the secular idea of billions of years and then some kind of "recreation". They may not, of course, but the translation choice is very dubious. They go on to correctly translate the remaining days of creation as "the second day", "the third day", etc, but that "one day" translation is really jarring.
While I'd really like to give the CSB more attention, a bible that makes such a big blunder so quickly doesn't fill me with much confidence.
Good observation! I prefer the first day also. But it literally says one day in the Hebrew.
I can't read any translation that blatanly misses the point of Deu 22:28
The CSB is not for everyone.
Too modern for me. I prefer the HCSB over the CSB
Some day I'll read the HCSB. Someone mentioned to me that the older HCSB editions are better and have better renderings. Is it true?